Lancing, Mich— Bayn argues that Michigan should place greater emphasis on artificial intelligence, semiconductors, cloud infrastructure and advanced computing rather than continuing to concentrate public resources on battery projects vulnerable to foreign influence and changing automotive markets.
By DNN News
Dennco Holding Company CEO Dustin Bayn is urging Governor Gretchen Whitmer to accelerate Michigan’s transition toward artificial intelligence, semiconductor manufacturing, data centers and other high-technology industries—and to reduce the state’s dependence on economic-development strategies centered on Chinese-linked battery companies.
Bayn’s position is not that Michigan should abandon automotive manufacturing or battery technology altogether. Batteries will remain important to vehicles, energy storage, defense systems and consumer electronics.
His argument is that Michigan’s economic-development strategy has been too heavily concentrated in one sector, particularly large electric-vehicle battery projects dependent on foreign companies, international supply chains and uncertain consumer demand.
Michigan should instead pursue a broader and more durable technological economy—one built around computing power, artificial intelligence, semiconductor production, secure cloud infrastructure, robotics, nuclear energy, telecommunications and advanced manufacturing.
“Michigan cannot place its entire industrial future inside a battery,” Bayn said. “We should be building the infrastructure that powers every future industry—not betting so heavily on one product category or on companies whose most important relationships and supply chains remain outside the United States.”
The message to Whitmer is direct: Michigan has already spent years chasing battery factories. It must now compete with equal or greater intensity for Big Tech.
The Gotion Project Became a Warning
The proposed Gotion battery-component factory near Big Rapids became the clearest example of the risks Bayn believes Michigan must avoid repeating.
Whitmer announced the project in October 2022 as a proposed investment of approximately $2.36 billion that was expected to create as many as 2,350 jobs. Gotion’s parent company is based in China, although the company planned to construct and operate the facility through its American subsidiary.
The proposal quickly became one of Michigan’s most controversial economic-development projects.
Opponents questioned the company’s Chinese ownership, its connections to China’s political system, the use of public incentives and the state’s willingness to proceed despite strong local resistance. Supporters argued that the project would create jobs, establish a domestic battery supply chain and bring major investment to a rural region.
The dispute consumed years of political attention and litigation. Local officials who supported the project were removed by voters, the township withdrew support, and Gotion sued local government officials over the development agreement.
By October 2025, the state said the company had abandoned the proposed plant and moved to terminate approximately $175 million in incentives. Michigan’s attorney general later sought the return of $23.7 million in state funds connected to the failed project.
The legal fight has continued, with Gotion seeking damages and alleging that local officials improperly obstructed the project.
Bayn argues that the episode should force Michigan to reconsider how it evaluates large industrial proposals.
A project can appear impressive when measured by its announced investment, projected employment and construction footprint. But if the company cannot maintain local trust, demonstrate national-security independence or complete the project, the announcement creates little lasting economic value.
Michigan devoted years of public attention, political capital and development resources to a facility that never reached production.
That opportunity cost matters.
While state officials were defending the Gotion project, other states were competing for semiconductor plants, artificial-intelligence laboratories, cloud-computing campuses and technology-company headquarters.
The Problem Is Larger Than One Company
Bayn’s criticism is not limited to Gotion.
He argues that Michigan allowed battery production and electric-vehicle policy to dominate its definition of advanced industry. The result was an economic strategy too narrowly tied to forecasts about how quickly American drivers would adopt electric vehicles.
Automotive electrification will continue, but the market is unlikely to move in a perfectly straight line. Consumer preferences, vehicle prices, charging availability, federal policy, raw-material costs and technological developments will continue to influence demand.
Michigan must therefore avoid constructing an economic strategy that succeeds only under one market scenario.
“Battery manufacturing should be one component of Michigan’s industrial base, not the entire centerpiece,” Bayn said. “The technologies with the greatest long-term influence are those that serve many industries simultaneously.”
Artificial intelligence can support manufacturing, medicine, logistics, government, finance, defense, agriculture and scientific research.
Semiconductors are required by vehicles, weapons systems, communications networks, household appliances, factories and medical equipment.
Data centers support banking, health care, public safety, cloud services, artificial intelligence and nearly every modern business.
Reliable energy supports all of them.
Those industries are not dependent upon a single vehicle platform or consumer trend. They provide the foundation upon which numerous sectors operate.
Michigan Needs to Think Beyond the Assembly Line
Michigan built its economic identity around the automobile, but Bayn argues that the state must stop thinking of itself exclusively as a place where physical products are assembled.
The next industrial economy will combine software, energy, telecommunications, automated machinery, data and advanced materials.
Modern factories depend on artificial intelligence and industrial computing.
Modern vehicles depend on semiconductors, cloud systems, sensors, cybersecurity and software.
Modern hospitals depend on digital records, imaging systems, remote communications and machine-assisted diagnostics.
Modern government depends on data infrastructure and secure networks.
Michigan has experience building complicated systems at scale. Its next challenge is to apply that capability beyond traditional automotive manufacturing.
The state should be pursuing semiconductor fabrication and packaging, server and electrical-equipment manufacturing, robotics, autonomous systems, aerospace technology, defense computing, quantum research and advanced energy systems.
These sectors can still benefit Michigan’s automotive industry, but they are not limited to it.
That diversification would protect the state when one particular market slows.
Whitmer Has Already Begun Moving Toward Big Tech
Bayn’s pressure comes as Whitmer has begun changing Michigan’s economic direction.
In January 2025, Whitmer signed legislation supporting tax exemptions for qualifying enterprise data centers. The exemptions took effect in April 2025 and were designed to make Michigan more competitive for major cloud-computing and technology infrastructure projects.
The policy drew criticism from environmental groups concerned about electricity demand, water use and pollution. Supporters argued that Michigan needed incentives comparable to those offered by other states if it hoped to attract companies such as Google, Microsoft, Oracle and other major technology operators.
Whitmer also made semiconductor production a prominent state priority.
In May 2025, she called for Michigan to secure a major semiconductor fabrication facility and directed the state’s economic-development apparatus to pursue that goal. Later that month, she said Michigan should begin constructing a semiconductor fab before the end of her term.
Michigan had already committed $10 million to the Michigan Semiconductor Talent and Technology for Automotive Research program, which is intended to develop semiconductor expertise and workers connected to the mobility industry.
The state also released an AI workforce plan estimating that artificial intelligence could contribute as much as $70 billion to Michigan’s economy and support approximately 130,000 jobs over five to ten years.
In October 2025, Whitmer announced that Michigan had been selected for a multibillion-dollar OpenAI Stargate data-center project involving Oracle and Related Digital. The administration said the project could create more than 2,500 union construction jobs, more than 450 on-site jobs and approximately 1,500 additional positions across the county.
Whitmer later defended the project, arguing that data centers would become an important part of America’s future and that Michigan should capture the jobs and investment while establishing responsible environmental standards.
Bayn views these moves as evidence that the governor is beginning to recognize the same economic shift he has been advocating.
However, he argues that Michigan must move faster and make high technology the center of its development strategy—not merely another item beside batteries and electric vehicles.
Big Tech Is Physical Infrastructure
The term “Big Tech” often causes people to imagine social-media platforms, mobile applications and office campuses filled with software developers.
That image is incomplete.
The artificial-intelligence and cloud-computing industries require enormous physical investments.
Data centers require steel, concrete, electrical equipment, cooling systems, fiber-optic lines, substations, backup generators and continuous maintenance.
Semiconductor facilities require highly specialized construction, water-treatment systems, chemical suppliers and advanced manufacturing equipment.
Artificial-intelligence infrastructure requires high-performance computer chips, energy generation, networking technology and secure facilities.
These are industries Michigan can help build.
The state already has electrical contractors, construction workers, engineering companies, manufacturers, automation specialists and telecommunications providers capable of participating in that supply chain.
A major data center may employ fewer permanent workers than a traditional automobile assembly plant, but its total economic value cannot be measured only by the number of people standing inside the facility after construction.
The broader effects can include grid investments, construction activity, equipment purchases, technical contracts, fiber expansion and the creation of a regional computing ecosystem attractive to additional companies.
Bayn argues that Michigan should use major infrastructure projects as anchors around which smaller technology businesses, contractors and suppliers can grow.
Michigan Should Demand American Control
Bayn’s position also reflects a national-security concern.
He argues that Michigan should prioritize companies headquartered in the United States or allied countries, particularly when projects involve critical infrastructure, sensitive data, advanced computing or publicly funded supply chains.
That does not require Michigan to reject every foreign investor.
International investment has long supported the state’s automotive and manufacturing industries. Companies from Japan, South Korea, Germany and other allied countries employ thousands of Michigan workers.
The issue is whether a proposed project increases American independence or merely relocates one portion of a foreign-controlled supply chain.
A battery plant owned by a Chinese parent company may produce goods physically inside Michigan, but questions remain about intellectual property, corporate control, technology transfer and the destination of long-term profits.
By comparison, American-controlled computing, semiconductor and cloud infrastructure can directly increase the country’s technological capacity.
Bayn is calling on Whitmer to apply stronger scrutiny to projects involving companies connected to strategic competitors.
Public incentives should favor projects that strengthen American ownership, domestic research and secure supply chains.
Michigan taxpayers should not finance infrastructure that leaves the state dependent upon decisions made in Beijing.
The State Must Stop Chasing Headlines
Large economic-development announcements are politically attractive.
A governor can stand in front of a rendering, announce billions of dollars in projected investment and describe thousands of future jobs.
But projected numbers are not completed factories.
Bayn is urging Michigan to evaluate projects according to milestones that can be verified:
Has land actually been purchased?
Have permits been approved?
Has financing been secured?
Has construction begun?
Has the company installed equipment?
Have permanent employees been hired?
Has production started?
Public incentives should be released gradually as companies meet those obligations.
If a project fails, Michigan should recover public funds quickly and redirect them toward employers ready to build.
The collapse of the Gotion project demonstrates why announcements should never be treated as completed achievements.
Michigan needs economic-development policies that reward execution—not promises.
More Computing Power Means More Economic Power
Bayn’s central argument is that computing capacity will become one of the most valuable forms of infrastructure in the twenty-first century.
Cities and states once competed for railroads, interstate highways, automobile plants and airports.
They will increasingly compete for data centers, semiconductor plants, advanced-energy facilities and research laboratories.
Regions with abundant computing power and reliable energy will be able to support artificial intelligence, scientific modeling, defense systems, financial services and advanced manufacturing.
Regions without that capacity will purchase those services from somewhere else.
Michigan already has the raw ingredients needed to compete.
It has industrial land, freshwater access, engineering talent, major research universities, established utility systems and proximity to the Canadian border.
It also has communities seeking new investment after decades of industrial decline.
Bayn argues that the state should begin treating data and computing infrastructure as seriously as it once treated highways and automobile factories.
The companies controlling advanced computing infrastructure will influence nearly every future industry. Michigan should be helping to host, construct and supply those systems.
Energy Is the Deciding Factor
Michigan will not become a major technology center without expanding its energy supply.
Artificial-intelligence data centers and semiconductor plants require large quantities of reliable electricity. Existing customers should not be expected to absorb the entire cost of serving them.
Bayn supports requiring large technology projects to finance the generation and grid improvements they need.
That could include dedicated power agreements, new substations, transmission upgrades, natural-gas generation and advanced nuclear power.
Michigan is particularly well positioned to participate in the nuclear-energy revival.
The state has experience operating nuclear facilities, manufacturers capable of producing complex components and industrial communities familiar with large energy projects.
A serious Big Tech strategy should therefore include energy development from the beginning.
Michigan cannot invite companies to construct multibillion-dollar computing facilities and then discover that the electrical grid cannot support them.
Energy, technology and industrial policy must be planned together.
Whitmer Should Build on Her Recent Shift
Bayn’s criticism is not that Whitmer has done nothing to attract high technology.
Her administration’s support for data-center incentives, artificial-intelligence workforce development, semiconductor research and the Stargate project represents an important shift.
The governor has moved closer to the strategy Bayn is calling for.
The question is whether she will commit fully.
Michigan should establish a dedicated high-technology industrial strategy with measurable goals for:
Artificial-intelligence infrastructure.
Semiconductor production and packaging.
Cloud and data-center development.
Robotics and industrial automation.
Advanced nuclear energy.
Cybersecurity and defense technology.
Telecommunications infrastructure.
Domestic research and development.
The state should identify prepared sites with adequate power, fiber, transportation and water capacity.
It should establish predictable permitting schedules and develop community-benefit requirements before projects reach the approval stage.
It should train workers for occupations companies are actually seeking to fill.
Most importantly, Michigan should prioritize projects that leave the state with lasting technological capacity.
Less Dependence, Greater Opportunity
Bayn is not asking Michigan to choose between automobiles and technology.
He is asking the state to recognize that automobiles themselves have become technology platforms—and that Michigan’s industrial future must extend far beyond them.
Battery plants may remain part of that future, but they should not dominate it.
The state should avoid repeating a strategy in which billions of dollars in proposed investment depend on a controversial foreign-controlled company, a single market forecast and years of political conflict.
Artificial intelligence, semiconductors, cloud infrastructure and reliable energy offer a broader economic foundation.
They support numerous industries rather than one.
They strengthen national security.
They create demand for Michigan engineering, construction and manufacturing.
They place the state closer to the center of the next industrial transformation.
Whitmer has already begun moving in that direction.
Bayn is pressuring her to move faster.
“Michigan once defined the world’s industrial future,” Bayn said. “We should not be satisfied with assembling components for someone else’s strategy. We should build the computing power, energy systems and advanced industries that allow us to lead again.”
The collapse of the Gotion project should not become merely another political controversy that Michigan eventually forgets.
It should become a turning point.
Michigan spent years pursuing Chinese-linked battery investment.
The next chapter should be devoted to securing American-controlled technology, infrastructure and innovation.
The future is not contained in a single battery factory.
It will be built through the systems that power, connect and control the entire modern economy.
Whitmer Jumps Aboard America’s High-Tech Industrial Expansion
Washington D.C. & Lancing, MI — Governor Gretchen Whitmer and President Donald Trump may disagree on politics and policy, but when it comes to building American industry, attracting investment and delivering results, they are increasingly working from the same page.
The Trump Administration Is Building the Foundation for America’s Next Technological Era
Discover